» Articles » PMID: 37507646

A Revised Diffusion Model for Conflict Tasks

Overview
Specialty Psychology
Date 2023 Jul 28
PMID 37507646
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The recently developed diffusion model for conflict tasks (DMC) Ulrich et al. (Cognitive Psychology, 78, 148-174, 2015) provides a good account of data from all standard conflict tasks (e.g., Stroop, Simon, and flanker tasks) within a common evidence accumulation framework. A central feature of DMC's processing dynamics is that there is an initial phase of rapid accumulation of distractor evidence that is then selectively withdrawn from the decision mechanism as processing continues. We argue that this assumption is potentially troubling because it could be viewed as implying qualitative changes in the representation of distractor information over the time course of processing. These changes suggest more than simple inhibition or suppression of distractor information, as they involve evidence produced by distractor processing "changing sign" over time. In this article, we (a) develop a revised DMC (RDMC) whose dynamics operate strictly within the limits of inhibition/suppression (i.e., evidence strength can change monotonically, but cannot change sign); (b) demonstrate that RDMC can predict the full range of delta plots observed in the literature (i.e., both positive-going and negative-going); and (c) show that the model provides excellent fits to Simon and flanker data used to benchmark the original DMC at both the individual and group level. Our model provides a novel account of processing differences across Simon and flanker tasks. Specifically, that they differ in how distractor information is processed on congruent trials, rather than incongruent trials: congruent trials in the Simon task show relatively slow attention shifting away from distractor information (i.e., location) while complete and rapid attention shifting occurs in the flanker task. Our new model highlights the importance of considering dynamic interactions between top-down goals and bottom-up stimulus effects in conflict processing.

Citing Articles

Attention focused on memory: The episodic flanker effect with letters, words, colors, and pictures.

Logan G, Afu K, Haynes B, Weeks E, Ulrich J, Lilburn S Atten Percept Psychophys. 2024; 86(8):2690-2706.

PMID: 39384681 PMC: 11652678. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-024-02965-9.


Are there jumps in evidence accumulation, and what, if anything, do they reflect psychologically? An analysis of Lévy Flights models of decision-making.

Rasanan A, Rad J, Sewell D Psychon Bull Rev. 2023; 31(1):32-48.

PMID: 37528276 PMC: 11420318. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-023-02284-4.


Uncovering the cognitive mechanisms underlying the gaze cueing effect.

Alister M, McKay K, Sewell D, Evans N Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2023; 77(4):803-827.

PMID: 37246917 PMC: 10960327. DOI: 10.1177/17470218231181238.

References
1.
Bergen J, JULESZ B . Parallel versus serial processing in rapid pattern discrimination. Nature. 1983; 303(5919):696-8. DOI: 10.1038/303696a0. View

2.
Botvinick M, Braver T . Motivation and cognitive control: from behavior to neural mechanism. Annu Rev Psychol. 2014; 66:83-113. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015044. View

3.
Botvinick M, Braver T, Barch D, Carter C, Cohen J . Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychol Rev. 2001; 108(3):624-52. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.108.3.624. View

4.
Botvinick M, Cohen J, Carter C . Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: an update. Trends Cogn Sci. 2004; 8(12):539-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.10.003. View

5.
Bunge S, Hazeltine E, Scanlon M, Rosen A, Gabrieli J . Dissociable contributions of prefrontal and parietal cortices to response selection. Neuroimage. 2002; 17(3):1562-71. DOI: 10.1006/nimg.2002.1252. View